Discussing each company’s purpose or purposes for providing a GRI or IR

The Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting is mainly disclosed by the organisations for reporting their impact on critical sustainability issues such as human rights, governance, and social well beings. In addition, with the help of Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting, BHP Billiton and ANZ bank is mainly able to depict the level of corporate social responsibility that is maintained by the companies. The financial report disclosed under Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting directly increases trends of the organisation, while detecting the financial performance of the organisation. Furthermore, the disclosures conducted from Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting directly focuses on providing more assessable higher quality data for analysing performance of the organisation. BHP Billiton with their Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting is able to provide their accounting information to their shareholders regarding their future prospects (Globalreporting.org, 2018). This disclosure relevantly indicates the high level of exposure that is faced by the company, which might generate high level of returns from investment. The reports provided by BHP Billiton relatively includes the information regarding its assets, which is wholly owned and operated by the organisation. The Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting provided by ANZ Bank relatively consists of two sections, where purpose of the business is adequately disclosed including purpose, values, and corporate social sustainability framework. Furthermore, identification of stakeholders, governance, risk management, materials significant and issues are adequate depicted in the sustainability framework.

There are key stakeholders that needs who are interested in the Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting measure, which could help in understanding the level of operating conducted by companies under the fiscal years. In addition, the stakeholders such as government, contactors, suppliers, external customers, top management, project team management, manager, peers, resource manager, and internal customers. The identified stakeholders might help in understanding the level of demand of the Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating reporting, which will be accommodated for the particular stakeholders. In this context, Belkhir, Bernard & Abdelgadir (2017) stated that GRI and IR reporting system is mainly allows stakeholders of the organisation to understand the level of operations, which could be conducted from its current financial performance.

The stakeholders such as government utilise the information to understand the sustainable measures and ethical consideration conducted by the company in completing their performance. In addition, the contractor and suppliers require the GRI and IR reporting system to understand the level of cash availability and cash position, which could understand their level to support payments. In addition, the top management with the help of the GRI and IR reporting is able to understand the current financial projection of the company. This allows the management to make adequate investment decisions, which could help in obtaining sustainable growth in future. Furthermore, the management and employees of the organisation use the GRI and IR reporting system to understand the current financial position of the organisation, which helps in understanding its ability to support administrative expenses in future. Lastly, the investment uses the IR and GRI report in understanding the financial position of the company, which detecting the financial trend. This mainly helps them to understand the current financial position of the organisation, which helps in making adequate investment decisions. Godha & Jain (2015) argued that companies using unethical measures in disclosing the GRI and IR report might directly have negative impact on decisions made by stakeholders.

Identifying key stakeholders with an interest in the report and explaining why each stakeholder could be interested

After evaluating the Global Reporting Initiative of BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank relevant similarities and difference can be detected, which might help in detecting the significance of the report provided by the companies. In addition, the major similarities can be identified from the overall Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting, which indicates the financial performance of the organisations. The Global Reporting Initiative and Integrating Reporting mainly represent the financial performance of the organisations, which could support investors in making adequate investment decisions. In this context, Bernard, Abdelgadir, & Belkhir (2015) stated that with the help of GRI reporting measures stakeholders are mainly able to understand the level of financial performance of the organisation.

The GRI reporting used by BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank mainly consist of corporate sustainable framework that is followed by the organisation, which depicts the financial stability of both the companies. In addition, the GRI report also consist of different level of returns, which is conducted by the company to increase its returns from investment. The report directly provides all the relevant information regarding the sustainability performance summary of the organisation. This relevantly indicates the different types of responsible business lending, environment, employees, community, customers, and voluntary tax transparency of the organisation. There is no significance different on the overall GRI report between BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank. This mainly indicates that GRI guidelines is adequately supported by both the companies, which depicts all the relevant information to their shareholders (Globalreporting.org, 2018).

The quality of the information that is provided by the GRI report of BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank relevantly indicates the financial performance of the organisation. The quality of the information is relatively depicted in the following measures.

Reliable:

The information provided by BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank on their GRI report is relevantly reliable, as the companies adequately provided information in accordance with the GRI guidelines. The information relevantly indicates the reliability of the data used by the companies in drafting their GRI report. The reliability factor of both GRI report is relevantly high, which indicates the possible attributes of the organisations financial position (Lin, Chang & Chang, 2015).

Relevant:

The quality of the information provided by the both BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank is adequate, as it helps in depicting the financial performance of the organisation to its stakeholders. The relevancy of the information is high, which allows the investors in maximising the level of returns that might be generate from investment. This might also help in understanding the level of operations, which is conducted by the organisation during the current fiscal year.

Comparable:

The GRI report drafted by BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank is relevantly comparable with other reports of its competitions. This mainly helps in understanding viability of the annual report, which could depict financial condition of both the companies.

The GRI report is mainly evaluated in accordance with the current standards or frameworks, which depict the current financial condition of the organisation. Both BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank relevantly depicts the framework of the organisation, where the companies adequately support the framework guidelines. The relevant aim of GRI Framework aims in enabling the third parties to adequately assess environmental impact of activities conducted by the company and its supply chain. With the help of GRI measure organisation needs to provide all the relevant information, which discloses their critical impacts that have both positive and negative impact on environment, society, and the economy. In this context, Hahn & Lulfs (2014) stated that sustainability reporting guidelines relevantly indicates the positive measures, which might depict the accurate position of the organisation. On the contrary, Calabrese et al., (2017) argued that some companies do not follow the GRI guidelines, which does not depict their actual financial performance. Therefore, from the evaluation of BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank GRI repot it could be understood that company has effectively followed the relevant framework. This relevantly indicates the significant sustainability of the organisation in depicting the financial performance of the organisation.

The current sustainability report depicted by BHP Billiton and ANZ Bank mainly indicates the financial position of both the companies. In addition, the GRI report mainly depicts the sustainable measures, which is conducted by companies in contemplating their operations. Furthermore, the evaluation also helps in understanding the level of ethical operations that is conducted by the companies. The stakeholders with the help of GRI report is able to understand the financial performance of the organisation. The stakeholders also evaluates the current information, which have positive and negative impact on environment, society, and the economy (Globalreporting.org, 2018).

Reference

Anz.com. (2018). Anz.com. Retrieved 9 June 2018, from https://www.anz.com/about-us/corporate-sustainability/reporting-performance/sustainability-reporting/

Belkhir, L., Bernard, S., & Abdelgadir, S. (2017). Does GRI reporting impact environmental sustainability? A cross-industry analysis of CO2 emissions performance between GRI-reporting and non-reporting companies. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 28(2), 138-155.

Bernard, S., Abdelgadir, S., & Belkhir, L. (2015). Does GRI reporting impact environmental sustainability? An industry-specific analysis of CO2 emissions performance between reporting and non-reporting companies. Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(9), 190.

Calabrese, A., Costa, R., Ghiron, N. L., & Menichini, T. (2017). To be, or not to be, that is the Question. Is Sustainability Report Reliable?. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(3), 519-526.

del Mar Alonso-Almeida, M., Marimon, F., Casani, F., & Rodriguez-Pomeda, J. (2015). Diffusion of sustainability reporting in universities: current situation and future perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 144-154.

Global Reporting Initiative. (2014). Materiality in the context of the GRI reporting framework. Retrieved April, 18.

Globalreporting.org. (2018). Globalreporting.org. Retrieved 9 June 2018, from https://www.globalreporting.org/Pages/FR-BHPBilliton-2017.aspx

Globalreporting.org. (2018). Globalreporting.org. Retrieved 9 June 2018, from https://www.globalreporting.org/information/g4/Pages/default.aspx

Globalreporting.org. (2018). Globalreporting.org. Retrieved 9 June 2018, from https://www.globalreporting.org/Information/about-gri/Pages/default.aspx

Godha, A., & Jain, P. (2015). Sustainability reporting trend in Indian companies as per GRI framework: a comparative study. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, 4(1), 62-73.

Hahn, R., & Lülfs, R. (2014). Legitimizing negative aspects in GRI-oriented sustainability reporting: A qualitative analysis of corporate disclosure strategies. Journal of business ethics, 123(3), 401-420.

Lin, I. H. H., Chang, O., & Chang, C. A. (2015). Perceptions of gri reporting guidelines. International Journal of Sustainability Policy and Practice, 9(4),